You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This PR adds the necessary code to add a similarity mask to the exposure compensator of the stitching pipeline.
You can configure a similarity_threshold which defines a threshold on the relative error between the pixels of two images. If the error is above the threshold, it is ignored when calculating the exposure compensation. This allows the removal of ghosting artifacts due to exposure compensation when part of the images are different (for instance a moving car which would only be present on a single picture)
Note that by default the behavior is unchanged.
Example
The top 2 images are the source images. The bottom left one used a block, per channel exposure compensation. The bottom right used the same, with a similarity threshold of 0.1.
Despite the seam finder and blender doing their job perfectly, the red artifact persists due to the exposure compensator.
The red rectangle has obviously been added artificially but that kind of artifact can exist naturally (example of a moving car above).
I agree to contribute to the project under Apache 2 License.
To the best of my knowledge, the proposed patch is not based on a code under GPL or other license that is incompatible with OpenCV
The PR is proposed to proper branch
There is reference to original bug report and related work
There is accuracy test, performance test and test data in opencv_extra repository, if applicable
Patch to opencv_extra has the same branch name.
The feature is well documented and sample code can be built with the project CMake
-> The feature is not documented, but neither are the other features are the exposure compensators. They belong to the detail namespace, I guess this is why ?
* support similarity masks
* add test for similarity threshold
* short license in test
* use UMat in buildSimilarityMask
* fix win32 warnings
* fix test indentation
* fix umat/mat sync
* no in-place argument for erode/dilate
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Content
This PR adds the necessary code to add a similarity mask to the exposure compensator of the stitching pipeline.
You can configure a
similarity_threshold
which defines a threshold on the relative error between the pixels of two images. If the error is above the threshold, it is ignored when calculating the exposure compensation. This allows the removal of ghosting artifacts due to exposure compensation when part of the images are different (for instance a moving car which would only be present on a single picture)Note that by default the behavior is unchanged.
Example
The top 2 images are the source images. The bottom left one used a block, per channel exposure compensation. The bottom right used the same, with a similarity threshold of 0.1.
Despite the seam finder and blender doing their job perfectly, the red artifact persists due to the exposure compensator.
The red rectangle has obviously been added artificially but that kind of artifact can exist naturally (example of a moving car above).
Pull Request Readiness Checklist
See details at https://github.com/opencv/opencv/wiki/How_to_contribute#making-a-good-pull-request
Patch to opencv_extra has the same branch name.
-> The feature is not documented, but neither are the other features are the exposure compensators. They belong to the
detail
namespace, I guess this is why ?